4 ms·

The best part had to be the whole moral grandstanding they had when doing it. Controlled digital lending was tolerated. It was never legal. I can't buy a bunc

The best part had to be the whole moral grandstanding they had when doing it. Controlled digital lending was tolerated. It was never legal. I can't buy a bunch of DVDs and start a streaming service even if a each copy can only be watched by a single person at a time. It really sucks since they do a lot of good work aside from this.

vessenes 2y ago
Nitpick - I think if your DVD streaming service is free and single-person only, then you probably can - it would qualify under space or time shifting concepts. I don't think you have the right to monetize a DVD you purchase in general in the US, though.
- 999900000999 2y ago
  I imagine if it was like... You vessenes have an account, you can buy DVDs that I store for you, and you can view these DVDs using my service. Even then odds are I'd get sued for copyright infringement.
- marcus0x62 2y ago
  > it would qualify under space or time shifting concepts. With the monumentally idiotic Aereo[1] decision, I wouldn't be so sure about that. 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_Inc._v._Aereo,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_In....
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  Didn't work for that company that rented you an actual physical individual tv antenna which you accessed remotely.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
jordanb 2y ago
The emergency library wasn't what publishers sued over. They used it perhaps as a rhetorical cover but what they were actually suing to prevent is IA offering digital versions of scanned hardcopy books. With IA's loss, publishers get to control the way libraries lend digital media because you can't take a hardcopy and legally "scan" it into a digital copy, so the only way to get a digital copy for lending is as a DRMed product from a publisher that does things like, for instance, expire after a certain number of loans. Publishers considered scanned digital copies controlled by libraries to be a threat to their monetization efforts surrounding digital lending and they would eventually have sued IA regardless of the emergency library. Moreover, the DRMed digital lending schemes that the publishers are "offering" libraries are very expensive compared to what a hardcover copy of the same work would have been, and publishers are increasingly vacuuming up libraries' entire budgets with excessive digital lending fees. It's been observed that libraries would be illegal if they didn't already exist, and I think we're starting to walk down the road where they are illegal in the digital world.
- coliveira 2y ago
  All this could be avoided with some sensible legislation. Publishers should be prohibited from taking advantage of libraries, and some minimal compensation scheme should be offered for digital lending. Of course, that's not what companies want. It is the wild west of modern capitalism.
- sitkack 2y ago
  > It's been observed that libraries would be illegal if they didn't already exist, and I think we're starting to walk down the road where they are illegal in the digital world. I believe this is the crux of the attack by publishers. They don't want libraries to be able to buy books and lend them out. They want libraries to pay a huge monthly fee for every book lent.
austinjp 2y ago
Did you ever hear of Zediva? "Zediva thought it could circumvent the need to be licensed by literally renting customers a DVD and a DVD player, with your computer, tablet or Google TV as the remote control. Unlike the other streaming movie services, Zediva didn't turn a movie into a file on its servers that it can serve it to as many users as care to see it at once. Instead, Zediva’s servers had DVD drives and actual DVDs. So when you rented a movie, that disc goes out of circulation until you release it back to the company, just like in one of those increasingly rare real-world video stores." https://www.wired.com/2011/08/zediva-shuts-down/ https://www.wired.com/2011/08/zediva-shuts-down/ More: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc._v._WTV_Systems,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_I....
snapetom 2y ago
> Controlled digital lending was tolerated. The comments here about the lawsuit not being about the Emergency Library completely are technically true, but ignore this sentence. IA poked the bear with it's brazen actions. > It was never legal. Before this lawsuit, we weren't sure about this, but by provoking the lawsuit, we've forced the courts to make this decision.

vessenes 2y ago

Nitpick - I think if your DVD streaming service is free and single-person only, then you probably can - it would qualify under space or time shifting concepts. I don't think you have the right to monetize a DVD you purchase in general in the US, though.

999900000999 2y ago
I imagine if it was like... You vessenes have an account, you can buy DVDs that I store for you, and you can view these DVDs using my service. Even then odds are I'd get sued for copyright infringement.
marcus0x62 2y ago
> it would qualify under space or time shifting concepts. With the monumentally idiotic Aereo[1] decision, I wouldn't be so sure about that. 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_Inc._v._Aereo,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_In....
Brian_K_White 2y ago
Didn't work for that company that rented you an actual physical individual tv antenna which you accessed remotely.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

jordanb 2y ago

The emergency library wasn't what publishers sued over. They used it perhaps as a rhetorical cover but what they were actually suing to prevent is IA offering digital versions of scanned hardcopy books. With IA's loss, publishers get to control the way libraries lend digital media because you can't take a hardcopy and legally "scan" it into a digital copy, so the only way to get a digital copy for lending is as a DRMed product from a publisher that does things like, for instance, expire after a certain number of loans. Publishers considered scanned digital copies controlled by libraries to be a threat to their monetization efforts surrounding digital lending and they would eventually have sued IA regardless of the emergency library. Moreover, the DRMed digital lending schemes that the publishers are "offering" libraries are very expensive compared to what a hardcover copy of the same work would have been, and publishers are increasingly vacuuming up libraries' entire budgets with excessive digital lending fees. It's been observed that libraries would be illegal if they didn't already exist, and I think we're starting to walk down the road where they are illegal in the digital world.

coliveira 2y ago
All this could be avoided with some sensible legislation. Publishers should be prohibited from taking advantage of libraries, and some minimal compensation scheme should be offered for digital lending. Of course, that's not what companies want. It is the wild west of modern capitalism.
sitkack 2y ago
> It's been observed that libraries would be illegal if they didn't already exist, and I think we're starting to walk down the road where they are illegal in the digital world. I believe this is the crux of the attack by publishers. They don't want libraries to be able to buy books and lend them out. They want libraries to pay a huge monthly fee for every book lent.

austinjp 2y ago

Did you ever hear of Zediva? "Zediva thought it could circumvent the need to be licensed by literally renting customers a DVD and a DVD player, with your computer, tablet or Google TV as the remote control. Unlike the other streaming movie services, Zediva didn't turn a movie into a file on its servers that it can serve it to as many users as care to see it at once. Instead, Zediva’s servers had DVD drives and actual DVDs. So when you rented a movie, that disc goes out of circulation until you release it back to the company, just like in one of those increasingly rare real-world video stores." https://www.wired.com/2011/08/zediva-shuts-down/ https://www.wired.com/2011/08/zediva-shuts-down/ More: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_Inc._v._WTV_Systems,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Entertainment_I....

snapetom 2y ago

> Controlled digital lending was tolerated. The comments here about the lawsuit not being about the Emergency Library completely are technically true, but ignore this sentence. IA poked the bear with it's brazen actions. > It was never legal. Before this lawsuit, we weren't sure about this, but by provoking the lawsuit, we've forced the courts to make this decision.